Gov. Palin speech -- a great political debut
- Thread starter skek_IHB
- Start date
[quote author="T!m" date=1221179623][quote author="WINEX" date=1221125471]So I don't see how anything Palin said about them being too expensive is wrong. It's been quite clear for anyone paying attention to what's happening in the housing markets in this country for the last 18 months that this thing was going to cost every tax payer a lot of money.</blockquote>
I agree.
What I don't understand is why anyone who would not have voted for McCain before he chose Palin as his running mate would now vote for him. Palin isn't going to be President. She's not going to have any power. She will be a Quayle type of VP, not a Cheney. Like many VPs, part of why she was chosen is that she is no threat to the candidate for President. Voting for McCain due to Palin being on the ticket is either desperate or dumb.
I expect the Dems to stop talking about her. She was bait and they bit. From now on, I expect the focus will go back to Obama and McCain. That will put the newly-excited Reps back to sleep.</blockquote>
This reply answers your question in the other thread about supporting small government, low taxes, and the Constitution as well as expands upon Skek's answer to your question about who may be attracted to voting for McCain because of Palin.
I lived most of my life in Arizona. I voted for McCain in the 1986 election where he took Barry Goldwater's old seat. After getting to know him, and after seeing the Republican Party lose it's way when the first President Bush enacted what was the largest tax increase in history (since eclipsed by Clinton), I vowed to never vote for McCain again. Between 1992 and 2004, I voted for whatever random Libertarian was on the ticket running against McCain.
Although I certainly think that McCain is the better person if given a choice between Obama and McCain, that isn't the choice we are given in November.
Before the Palin selection, I was positive that I would be voting for Bob Barr in November. My logic was simple. I could remain true to my beliefs, and when it comes down to it, if Obama wins California because I didn't vote for McCain, it would mean that McCain won the election in a landslide. Therefore I can remain true to my beliefs, but not worry about a negative impact on our country.
Now, while I am not sure that I am going to change that vote, I am paying more attention to this campaign. I'm thinking to myself that the choice of Palin was truly inspired and that there's a good chance that McCain may do a good job of picking judges too. I long ago resigned myself to the fact that McCain isn't and never will be a supply sider. But at least he is ethical and realizes that the war on Islamo-fascism is one of the defining issues of our times.
I may still vote for Barr and Root in November. But it's possible that I may vote for Palin and McCain too. (The order of the last choice was reversed intentionally)
On, one more thing, the two candidates I would have supported on the Republican ticket this year without question decided not to run. I would have loved to have seen Vice President Cheney run for President, and I think that Newt Gingrich would have been an excellent choice as well. The only person who did run that I could have given strong support to was Mitt Romney.
I agree.
What I don't understand is why anyone who would not have voted for McCain before he chose Palin as his running mate would now vote for him. Palin isn't going to be President. She's not going to have any power. She will be a Quayle type of VP, not a Cheney. Like many VPs, part of why she was chosen is that she is no threat to the candidate for President. Voting for McCain due to Palin being on the ticket is either desperate or dumb.
I expect the Dems to stop talking about her. She was bait and they bit. From now on, I expect the focus will go back to Obama and McCain. That will put the newly-excited Reps back to sleep.</blockquote>
This reply answers your question in the other thread about supporting small government, low taxes, and the Constitution as well as expands upon Skek's answer to your question about who may be attracted to voting for McCain because of Palin.
I lived most of my life in Arizona. I voted for McCain in the 1986 election where he took Barry Goldwater's old seat. After getting to know him, and after seeing the Republican Party lose it's way when the first President Bush enacted what was the largest tax increase in history (since eclipsed by Clinton), I vowed to never vote for McCain again. Between 1992 and 2004, I voted for whatever random Libertarian was on the ticket running against McCain.
Although I certainly think that McCain is the better person if given a choice between Obama and McCain, that isn't the choice we are given in November.
Before the Palin selection, I was positive that I would be voting for Bob Barr in November. My logic was simple. I could remain true to my beliefs, and when it comes down to it, if Obama wins California because I didn't vote for McCain, it would mean that McCain won the election in a landslide. Therefore I can remain true to my beliefs, but not worry about a negative impact on our country.
Now, while I am not sure that I am going to change that vote, I am paying more attention to this campaign. I'm thinking to myself that the choice of Palin was truly inspired and that there's a good chance that McCain may do a good job of picking judges too. I long ago resigned myself to the fact that McCain isn't and never will be a supply sider. But at least he is ethical and realizes that the war on Islamo-fascism is one of the defining issues of our times.
I may still vote for Barr and Root in November. But it's possible that I may vote for Palin and McCain too. (The order of the last choice was reversed intentionally)
On, one more thing, the two candidates I would have supported on the Republican ticket this year without question decided not to run. I would have loved to have seen Vice President Cheney run for President, and I think that Newt Gingrich would have been an excellent choice as well. The only person who did run that I could have given strong support to was Mitt Romney.
Nude_IHB
New member
[quote author="skek" date=1221185249][quote author="Nude" date=1221183332]Obama still holds an Electoral advantage and has yet to deliver a counter-punch to McCain's pick of Palin. I expect the debates to provide that opportunity, with the last two Presidential debates sealing the deal for one side or the other. Living in a predominantly Democratic state (Washington), I am not optimistic. I expect this race to hinge on Colorado and New Hampshire if it stays close but I won't be surprised if Obama gets more than 400 Electoral votes. Palin's usefulness was in her being both a surprise and a tough woman but, even if she creams Biden in the VP debate, she has brought in all the voter's she is going to get. Once the debates begin, it becomes about Obama vs. McCain. Saddleback taught the Obama campaign what to expect, so I don't expect him to come off as badly as he did in the debates. If he gets any bump at all, it will solidify his hold on his Electoral lead and that will be the end of McCain.</blockquote>
Barring an absolute meltdown, I don't see anyone getting to 400 electoral votes. I think McCain needs to hold Florida, Ohio and Colorado from 2004, and either retain Virginia or flip one of Michigan or Pennsylvania. Nevada and NM are also in play.
Here's the current <a href="http://www.electoral-vote.com/icon.html">electoral map</a>, based on polling data -- Obama has 273, with Florida's 27 votes a toss-up. If Obama takes Florida and all the states that are "barely" GOP, he gets to 352. Barring an October surprise, I don't see Obama moving the dials any further than that. By the way, four years ago, the same polling data predicted Kerry 317, Bush 202, with 19 tied.</blockquote>
I prefer <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10">realclearpolitics</a>. I don't think any of the southern states are a lock for McCain, no matter what the polls are reporting. Move those into Obama's side and he can make 402.
Barring an absolute meltdown, I don't see anyone getting to 400 electoral votes. I think McCain needs to hold Florida, Ohio and Colorado from 2004, and either retain Virginia or flip one of Michigan or Pennsylvania. Nevada and NM are also in play.
Here's the current <a href="http://www.electoral-vote.com/icon.html">electoral map</a>, based on polling data -- Obama has 273, with Florida's 27 votes a toss-up. If Obama takes Florida and all the states that are "barely" GOP, he gets to 352. Barring an October surprise, I don't see Obama moving the dials any further than that. By the way, four years ago, the same polling data predicted Kerry 317, Bush 202, with 19 tied.</blockquote>
I prefer <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10">realclearpolitics</a>. I don't think any of the southern states are a lock for McCain, no matter what the polls are reporting. Move those into Obama's side and he can make 402.
[quote author="skek" date=1221186108]What did you think about Fred Thompson, WINEX?</blockquote>
I thought that he was far more interesting before he joined the race than after he joined it. To me it didn't seem like his heart was really in it. But I think he would have been a fine President.
I thought that he was far more interesting before he joined the race than after he joined it. To me it didn't seem like his heart was really in it. But I think he would have been a fine President.
Trooper_IHB
New member
<span style="font-size: 15px;"><strong>GOP Campaign Downplays Palin Book-Banning Inquiry </strong></span>
<em> The Reverend Howard Bess, a liberal Christian preacher in the nearby town of Palmer, said the church Palin and her family attended until 2002, the Wasilla Assembly of God, was pushing to remove his book from local bookstores.
Emmons told him that year that several copies of <strong>Pastor, I Am Gay</strong> had disappeared from the library shelves, Bess said.
''Sarah brought pressure on the library about things she didn't like,'' Bess said. ''To believe that my book was not targeted in this is a joke.'' </em>
<a href="http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid61316.asp">Why am I not surprised ?</a>
<em> The Reverend Howard Bess, a liberal Christian preacher in the nearby town of Palmer, said the church Palin and her family attended until 2002, the Wasilla Assembly of God, was pushing to remove his book from local bookstores.
Emmons told him that year that several copies of <strong>Pastor, I Am Gay</strong> had disappeared from the library shelves, Bess said.
''Sarah brought pressure on the library about things she didn't like,'' Bess said. ''To believe that my book was not targeted in this is a joke.'' </em>
<a href="http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid61316.asp">Why am I not surprised ?</a>
serious weapon_IHB
New member
If Failin was a stock, I'd be shorting crap out of her.
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stum...n-s-favorability-ratings-begin-to-falter.aspx
Palin's Favorability Ratings Begin to Falter
Andrew Romano
To know her, it seems, is not necessarily to love her.
When John McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate late last month, the Alaska governor quickly became a media phenomenon. Largely unknown, she existed at first in something of an information vacuum, and due to the shock of her selection--everyone loves a surprise--the press rushed to fill the void with whatever data was easily available. Mostly this consisted of human interest material; Palin had plenty to go around. Mooseburgers. Float planes. Ice Fishing. Beauty pageants. Teen pregnancy. Et cetera. By the end of her first 15 minutes in the spotlight--which included her speech at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul--Palin existed mostly as an idea: a frontier supermom who'd triumphed over adversity (the Ol' Boys Club, the "liberal media"). Palin spent her first week reading from a teleprompter and avoiding questions from the press--and the public--so as not to sully this positive first impression.
Advertisement
The polls reflected the early success of her strategy. In the three days after Palin joined Team McCain--Aug. 29-31--32 percent of voters told the pollsters at Diageo/Hotline that they had a favorable opinion of her; most (48 percent) didn't know enough to say. (The Diageo/Hotline poll is conducted by Financial Dynamics opinion research; it's the only daily tracking poll to regularly publish approval ratings.) By Sept. 4, however, 43 percent of Diageo/Hotline respondents approved of Palin with only 25 percent disapproving--an 18-point split. Apparently, voters were liking what they were hearing. Four days later, Palin's approval rating had climbed to 47 percent (+17), and by Sept. 13 it had hit 52 percent. The gap at that point between her favorable and unfavorable numbers--22 percent--was larger than either McCain's (+20) or Obama's (+13).
But then a funny thing happened: Palin seems to have lost some of her luster. Since Sept. 13, Palin's unfavorables have climbed from 30 percent to 36 percent. Meanwhile, her favorables have slipped from 52 percent to 48 percent. That's a three-day net swing of -10 points, and it leaves her in the Sept. 15 Diageo/Hotline tracking poll tied for the smallest favorability split (+12)** of any of the Final Four. Over the course of a single weekend, in other words, Palin went from being the most popular White House hopeful to the least.
What happened? *First, it's important to note that Palin's approval rating hasn't tanked. Far from it. And we should hold off on drawing any hard and fast conclusions until more polling comes out.* That said, I suspect that we're starting to see Palin's considerable novelty wear off. In part it's the result of a steady stream of controversial stories: her apparent unfamiliarity with the Bush Doctrine during last Thursday's interview with Charles Gibson (video above); her refusal to cooperate with the Troopergate investigation; her repeated stretching of the truth on everything from earmarks to the "Bridge to Nowhere" to the amount of energy her state produces. That stuff has a way of inspiring disapproval and eroding one's support. (Interestingly, Palin's preparedness numbers--about 50 percent yes, 45 percent no--haven't budged.) But I'd argue that it's the start of an inevitable process. Between now and Nov. 4, voters will stop seeing Palin as a fascinating story and starting taking her measure as an actual candidate for office. Some will approve; some won't. It remains to be seen whether Palin's recent slide will continue, or hurt John McCain in the polls. But it's hard to argue that the journey from intriguing new superstar to earthbound politician--a necessary part of the process--doesn't involve a loss of altitude.
Just ask Barack Obama.
UPDATE, 2:27 p.m.: Also, it doesn't help when McCain's Victory 2008 chair Carly Fiorina, the former CEO of Hewlett-Packard, tells a St. Louis radio host that Palin would've been unqualified to lead HP--a slightly less demanding role than leading the free world. Today's exchange:
HOST: "Do you think she has the experience to run a major company like Hewlett Packard?"
FIORINA: "No, I don't. But that's not what she's running for."
Not the end of the world, obviously (Fiorina went on to say that Obama is even less prepared). Still, not the message the McCain campaign wants to be sending.
UPDATE, 5:47 p.m.: On MSNBC, Fiorina explains what she meant:
I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation. I don't think Barack Obama could run a major corporation. I don't think Joe Biden could. But it is not the same as being the president or vice president of the United States. It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company, so of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, John McCain, Barack Obama or Joe Biden are doing.
9:30 p.m.: *Added for context; ** Originally misprinted as "+10" due to an editing error
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stum...n-s-favorability-ratings-begin-to-falter.aspx
Palin's Favorability Ratings Begin to Falter
Andrew Romano
To know her, it seems, is not necessarily to love her.
When John McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate late last month, the Alaska governor quickly became a media phenomenon. Largely unknown, she existed at first in something of an information vacuum, and due to the shock of her selection--everyone loves a surprise--the press rushed to fill the void with whatever data was easily available. Mostly this consisted of human interest material; Palin had plenty to go around. Mooseburgers. Float planes. Ice Fishing. Beauty pageants. Teen pregnancy. Et cetera. By the end of her first 15 minutes in the spotlight--which included her speech at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul--Palin existed mostly as an idea: a frontier supermom who'd triumphed over adversity (the Ol' Boys Club, the "liberal media"). Palin spent her first week reading from a teleprompter and avoiding questions from the press--and the public--so as not to sully this positive first impression.
Advertisement
The polls reflected the early success of her strategy. In the three days after Palin joined Team McCain--Aug. 29-31--32 percent of voters told the pollsters at Diageo/Hotline that they had a favorable opinion of her; most (48 percent) didn't know enough to say. (The Diageo/Hotline poll is conducted by Financial Dynamics opinion research; it's the only daily tracking poll to regularly publish approval ratings.) By Sept. 4, however, 43 percent of Diageo/Hotline respondents approved of Palin with only 25 percent disapproving--an 18-point split. Apparently, voters were liking what they were hearing. Four days later, Palin's approval rating had climbed to 47 percent (+17), and by Sept. 13 it had hit 52 percent. The gap at that point between her favorable and unfavorable numbers--22 percent--was larger than either McCain's (+20) or Obama's (+13).
But then a funny thing happened: Palin seems to have lost some of her luster. Since Sept. 13, Palin's unfavorables have climbed from 30 percent to 36 percent. Meanwhile, her favorables have slipped from 52 percent to 48 percent. That's a three-day net swing of -10 points, and it leaves her in the Sept. 15 Diageo/Hotline tracking poll tied for the smallest favorability split (+12)** of any of the Final Four. Over the course of a single weekend, in other words, Palin went from being the most popular White House hopeful to the least.
What happened? *First, it's important to note that Palin's approval rating hasn't tanked. Far from it. And we should hold off on drawing any hard and fast conclusions until more polling comes out.* That said, I suspect that we're starting to see Palin's considerable novelty wear off. In part it's the result of a steady stream of controversial stories: her apparent unfamiliarity with the Bush Doctrine during last Thursday's interview with Charles Gibson (video above); her refusal to cooperate with the Troopergate investigation; her repeated stretching of the truth on everything from earmarks to the "Bridge to Nowhere" to the amount of energy her state produces. That stuff has a way of inspiring disapproval and eroding one's support. (Interestingly, Palin's preparedness numbers--about 50 percent yes, 45 percent no--haven't budged.) But I'd argue that it's the start of an inevitable process. Between now and Nov. 4, voters will stop seeing Palin as a fascinating story and starting taking her measure as an actual candidate for office. Some will approve; some won't. It remains to be seen whether Palin's recent slide will continue, or hurt John McCain in the polls. But it's hard to argue that the journey from intriguing new superstar to earthbound politician--a necessary part of the process--doesn't involve a loss of altitude.
Just ask Barack Obama.
UPDATE, 2:27 p.m.: Also, it doesn't help when McCain's Victory 2008 chair Carly Fiorina, the former CEO of Hewlett-Packard, tells a St. Louis radio host that Palin would've been unqualified to lead HP--a slightly less demanding role than leading the free world. Today's exchange:
HOST: "Do you think she has the experience to run a major company like Hewlett Packard?"
FIORINA: "No, I don't. But that's not what she's running for."
Not the end of the world, obviously (Fiorina went on to say that Obama is even less prepared). Still, not the message the McCain campaign wants to be sending.
UPDATE, 5:47 p.m.: On MSNBC, Fiorina explains what she meant:
I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation. I don't think Barack Obama could run a major corporation. I don't think Joe Biden could. But it is not the same as being the president or vice president of the United States. It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company, so of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, John McCain, Barack Obama or Joe Biden are doing.
9:30 p.m.: *Added for context; ** Originally misprinted as "+10" due to an editing error
Shooby_IHB
New member
Fact is, our country is in trouble and will continue to be in trouble no matter who wins the election.
This is a greater mess that two people will not be able to clean up in a short period of time.
This is a greater mess that two people will not be able to clean up in a short period of time.
socalmd_IHB
New member
I wish some politician had the guts to say that the people who used their house as a piggybank deserve their share of the blame. But alas, the common voter doesn't want to hear that.
[quote author="socalmd" date=1221705377]I wish some politician had the guts to say that the people who used their house as a piggybank deserve their share of the blame. But alas, the common voter doesn't want to hear that.</blockquote>
I believe that is the first intelligent thing I have seen you say. It's nice for a change.
I believe that is the first intelligent thing I have seen you say. It's nice for a change.
TimHume_IHB
New member
[quote author="WINEX" date=1221706194][quote author="socalmd" date=1221705377]I wish some politician had the guts to say that the people who used their house as a piggybank deserve their share of the blame. But alas, the common voter doesn't want to hear that.</blockquote>
I believe that is the first intelligent thing I have seen you say. It's nice for a change.</blockquote>
Yeah, doesn't it stink that one of the things we can agree on here at the IHB would be something that would kill a candidate's chance at getting elected.
I believe that is the first intelligent thing I have seen you say. It's nice for a change.</blockquote>
Yeah, doesn't it stink that one of the things we can agree on here at the IHB would be something that would kill a candidate's chance at getting elected.
[quote author="T!m" date=1221706393][quote author="WINEX" date=1221706194][quote author="socalmd" date=1221705377]I wish some politician had the guts to say that the people who used their house as a piggybank deserve their share of the blame. But alas, the common voter doesn't want to hear that.</blockquote>
I believe that is the first intelligent thing I have seen you say. It's nice for a change.</blockquote>
Yeah, doesn't it stink that one of the things we can agree on here at the IHB would be something that would kill a candidate's chance at getting elected.</blockquote>
I've got a different view of this one than you.
With the exception of the military, I can't think of many things that government does well.
Less government is better government.
So I think it's kind of nice that we can agree that things that kill candidate's chances are good. Especially when those candidates are Democrats.
I believe that is the first intelligent thing I have seen you say. It's nice for a change.</blockquote>
Yeah, doesn't it stink that one of the things we can agree on here at the IHB would be something that would kill a candidate's chance at getting elected.
</blockquote>I've got a different view of this one than you.
With the exception of the military, I can't think of many things that government does well.
Less government is better government.
So I think it's kind of nice that we can agree that things that kill candidate's chances are good. Especially when those candidates are Democrats.
socalmd_IHB
New member
[quote author="WINEX" date=1221706194][quote author="socalmd" date=1221705377]I wish some politician had the guts to say that the people who used their house as a piggybank deserve their share of the blame. But alas, the common voter doesn't want to hear that.</blockquote>
I believe that is the first intelligent thing I have seen you say. It's nice for a change.</blockquote>
Why thank you for the complimentary insult.
I believe that is the first intelligent thing I have seen you say. It's nice for a change.</blockquote>
Why thank you for the complimentary insult.
ventouxbob_IHB
New member
I also find it interesting that Obama was brave enough to go on O?Reilly. I doubt McCain or Palin would be interviewed on a show that was as blatantly biased and opposed to them as anything found on the Fox Network.
I saw that interview! Obama has Brass Balls. and he is less afraid to tell the truth even if it bad news. a nice change i think. Iread 2 of his book like what he had to say.
regarding the Alaskan. i dont think she added real value to the ticket. what weekness did Mcsame bolster? Dan Quale Part two.
I saw that interview! Obama has Brass Balls. and he is less afraid to tell the truth even if it bad news. a nice change i think. Iread 2 of his book like what he had to say.
regarding the Alaskan. i dont think she added real value to the ticket. what weekness did Mcsame bolster? Dan Quale Part two.
Shooby_IHB
New member
The more I see/hear of McCain and Palin the more I like Obama.
serious weapon_IHB
New member
[quote author="Shooby" date=1221722514]The more I see/hear of McCain and Palin the more I like Obama.</blockquote>
To vote for McCain/Palin ticket would be an abomination. To vote for Barry and Joe would be an OBAMANATION!!!
To vote for McCain/Palin ticket would be an abomination. To vote for Barry and Joe would be an OBAMANATION!!!
[quote author="socalmd" date=1221714164][quote author="WINEX" date=1221706194][quote author="socalmd" date=1221705377]I wish some politician had the guts to say that the people who used their house as a piggybank deserve their share of the blame. But alas, the common voter doesn't want to hear that.</blockquote>
I believe that is the first intelligent thing I have seen you say. It's nice for a change.</blockquote>
Why thank you for the complimentary insult.</blockquote>
When an honest statement can also be considered as an insult, it just might be time to engage in a little introspection.
You haven't posted here much, but I hadn't seen anything from you that was worth reading. That statement goes well beyond differences in political views of the world. I don't care what you believe, but I do care if whether or not you act like an 8 year old spreading those beliefs.
If you continue to have more posts like that, then I'll be more than happy to apologize for the complimentary insult.
I believe that is the first intelligent thing I have seen you say. It's nice for a change.</blockquote>
Why thank you for the complimentary insult.</blockquote>
When an honest statement can also be considered as an insult, it just might be time to engage in a little introspection.
You haven't posted here much, but I hadn't seen anything from you that was worth reading. That statement goes well beyond differences in political views of the world. I don't care what you believe, but I do care if whether or not you act like an 8 year old spreading those beliefs.
If you continue to have more posts like that, then I'll be more than happy to apologize for the complimentary insult.